Education.  After completing his degree, Selkis returned to San Francisco as the founding principal of a 7–12 school, which he developed in conjunction with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and San Francisco Unified School District as part of an initiative to create small secondary schools. He has been principal at Wood Road Intermediate School for three years, and is currently pursuing his Ph.D. in Administration and Educational Organization at Columbia University's Teacher's College.

Recently, Selkis was appointed chairperson overseeing the overhaul of BSCSD's reading program. After an intensive review of student reading proficiency, the district determined that its students should be performing at higher levels. Concurrently, the district decided to reconfigure its schools from separate K–2 primary centers and 3–5 intermediate schools to combined K–5 buildings, and transition from half-day kindergarten to a full-day program to further bolster academic progress.

BSCSD is a rural-suburban district in New York, located thirty-five miles north of Albany. The school's diversity is mainly economic, with 25 percent of the population receiving free or reduced lunch.

Beyond the Book recently spoke with Selkis about his efforts to improve the reading program in BSCSD and about his theories for affecting change at both the school and district levels.

BTB: What spurred the changes in grade configuration and the move from half-day to full-day kindergarten at BSCSD?

We spent two years analyzing our practices, which validated what we saw in the classroom and what teachers were saying. Additionally, we felt that our professional development program was designed as an event rather than a process—there was never any kind of follow-up or continuity. Even as teachers built their own capacity and moved to new levels, there was no focused plan to build capacity as a community. We realized we had to do a lot of different things to meet those needs. That's when we started looking at moving to a K–5 format. Beginning next year, we will have all of our students in one building for six years as opposed to having them in one school for K–2 and then another for 3–5, which prevented the flow of information from one school to the next.

BTB: What motivated the district's initiative to improve the reading program?

MS: As a district, we value guided reading and balanced literacy, but unfortunately, over time the implementation of our program fell apart. From class to class, you could experience different delivery of English Language Arts (ELA) instruction. Currently, if you look at New York state ELA achievement, about one out of every four students graduating from fifth grade is not yet proficient with reading. Essentially, our new reading program aims to address that piece—that we're not achieving at the rate we should be. We believe we should be at a 90-percent rate and we're falling 15 percent short of that expectation

Consequently, we're throwing away any assessment other than that of our new reading program. We're standardizing assessment; we're standardizing our scope and sequence; and we're making sure that we follow a pacing guide. Also, all professional development is embedded in learning the reading program—to make it a process, and not an event.

BTB: How did you determine what was lacking in the district's previous reading program?

MS: I chaired a committee composed of the three elementary school principals, the middle school principal, and ten teachers, who together represented kindergarten through fifth grade. We began with philosophical conversations about our vision and what we wanted to do. We had an open conversation about what ELA instruction should be and what the schools should be. Then, we looked at our data to establish a sense of urgency in what we were doing, which is key to invoking change. Meanwhile, we kept in mind the fact that we live under an umbrella of No Child Left Behind and work with children ages five to eleven. We wanted to make sure that we have a balanced approach that embraces each child, ensuring that they learn.

The data made it very clear that there was a gap in achievement in the upper grades. Many K–2 educators hadn't seen data from grades 3–5. Furthermore, there is no testing in grades K–2. It was interesting to get teachers from grades 3–5 talking with teachers from the lower grades. We were able to break through, establish a sense of urgency, and determine what we needed: to standardize assessments and scope and sequence, and embed professional development.

BTB: How did you choose your new reading program?

MS: Because of the sense of urgency, we chose to review reading programs from five major publishers. We created a template of things that were important to us as educators, and that we wanted in our new reading program. We looked for quality literature, good vocabulary, a clear process of scope and sequence, highly engaging instructional activities, a strong technology component, and a good supplemental program like grammar and spelling. Then we ranked these six components that we valued the most on a scale of one to five, with five being the greatest and one being the lowest, and looked at each program through that lens.

We only had teachers rank the components for each program because we wanted this to be a teacher-driven activity. At the end of the process, we added up the rankings. We knew we were not going to be able to please everyone, and we didn't want to go with consensus, so we decided to opt for the program with the highest score. We did not pick any program that ranked below a three. Only one program had all fours and fives, so we decided to make that one our new reading program.

Once we chose the program, we presented it to the board, held a parent night in the community, and presented our rationale to faculty and staff. We immediately established a professional development plan based on teacher input and teacher capacity. Also, the teachers can now access the reading program's website and begin working with the materials. Additionally, we created a variety of opportunities and different points of entry depending on where teachers are in the process.

BTB: What additional initiatives is the district implementing to help improve reading proficiency?

MS: At the building level, we've created a new scheduling template that includes more block scheduling. In the past, grade-level teams did not have any common planning time, which limited our ability to really jump into data assessment and have conversations about data-driven instruction. So, we have changed our schedule starting this year to allow all grade-level teams and staff to have at least sixty minutes per day of common planning time to meet with one another and an administrator and review both summative and formative data sets. This common time allows for conversations around our struggling students as well as our other students, and our scheduling initiative complements our new data-driven approach to reading instruction. Teachers need an opportunity to talk about what their data shows and to share best practices, so the scheduling piece is certainly going to augment our ability to do that.

We're also considering a change to our Response to Intervention (RTI) model to include a student-support team (SST). With this, teachers can refer children to a group of educators—teachers, administrators, social workers—who provide information about social history as well as academic history. Then, using data, anecdotal information, and personal history, we get a fuller picture of the student and develop an action plan to address both social-emotional and academic needs. We're creating a flow chart for our RTI model so that as the child moves through intervention, we have an efficient and thorough way of recording his or her growth. We're formalizing, standardizing, and streamlining all of our structures that support academics to ensure nothing is overlooked. We're trying to eliminate anonymity and siloed communications to share information and best practices, and keep track of where our children are going. That way, when a decision has to be made, we're making it based on input and data sets.

BTB: How are the teachers responding to the new initiatives?

MS: We've just begun professional development, and will begin implementing the reading program on the student level next September. Overall, the program has been very well-received. I think teachers were frustrated with having to create their own ELA curriculum individually, without training. I think 90 percent of the teachers are happy to have new materials, a scope and sequence, and the assessments provided in the program. Obviously, with any kind of change, there are dissenters. A lot of our work is getting teachers to do things differently. As primary reading instructors, our teachers need to be adaptable, teaching not only just the core but also tier-two and eventually tier-three reading levels in heterogeneous classes. We need to build capacity so that teachers can take on a different approach to reading. This is a process and implementation is going to take an entire year. Currently, we are setting that expectation and building communications around doing things differently.

BTB: Are there any additional ways in which the district is supporting the teachers?

MS: We have set up a blog to initiate an ongoing professional conversation through which teachers can write questions, concerns, and responses about the new reading program. Teachers can respond to each other, with postings in real time. Also, I am creating a monthly newsletter for the teachers based on the blog, to highlight the conversations and show successes. It's a medium where we all can share.

Additionally, we've extended our reading committee into next year to continue our monthly meetings. We want feedback from our teachers and administrators to guide professional development. We plan to implement a little at a time, get feedback, make adjustments, and continue implementing a little bit more. It's a slow roll-out over the course of the year. We've been very clear with our teachers about the year-long process. It's a dialogue, and we hope they share with us what they're going through so that we can continue to support them. I think this give and take has alleviated some of the inherent stress of change.

Our ongoing embedded professional development plan provides a full day of discussions around reading implementation in October. We chose this date because we wanted to have six weeks of implementation beforehand to ensure we have enough data and enough understanding of teacher and student experience. This day will be reflective of the first six weeks of implementation. Then, in six weeks from that time, we'll schedule another day of professional development to refocus, answer questions, and train teachers on what they might be struggling with.

BTB: Based on these districtwide changes, how do you plan on measuring and reporting success going forward?

MS: We'll use benchmark assessments and leveled-reader assessments to measure growth. In three to five years, we will take a look at state assessments because we anticipate a bump there. We will also use classroom observations and input from teacher meetings. Additionally, I'm developing a parent forum where parents can discuss their children's progress. I've also recently put together a survey for teachers so we can get a sense of their progress. I think with all of these data points, we'll be able to report how the implementation is going and the direction we need to go in. We're looking at a lot of different ways of bringing in that type of information.

BTB: Do you see this as a potential model for other subject areas as well?

MS: Absolutely. You can apply this model to other building-level initiatives. By bringing building-level personnel and teachers together, you can have profound educational conversations to discuss what they value and what's working. You can analyze programming, educational research about best practices, and change dynamics to establish a sense of urgency early and a rationale for why change is coming. Marry that with coalition-building, information-sharing, and strong professional development and you can invoke change on the school level, district level, or state level.

We are also reviewing Richard Elmore's theory of backward mapping. Instead of starting at the beginning, you start at the end and determine what you want your results to be. What do you want that classroom to look like? What do you want to happen between teachers and students? You start the conversation there, and then work backwards each step of the way until you get to the where a committee is meeting about how to get there. It's an interesting way of looking at change.

BTB: Can you describe the foreign language program at Wood Road Intermediate School?

MS: Currently, we have an afterschool foreign language program, which we are looking at extending to all of the K–5 schools. We offer Spanish, French, and German on Tuesdays, Wednesdays, and Thursdays from 3:30 p.m. to 4:20 p.m. We also have language nights for parents, and we display our children's new language skills or their art work. Students sign up for the program, and this year we've had 350 of our 560 kids enroll. It's been a huge hit—the students love it.

BTB: What do you find is the value in getting kids to learn different languages, and how has your district supported this effort?

MS: I think there are so many benefits. Romance languages expose children to Latin roots and familiarize them with common words. Additionally, I think it trains students to be open and accepting of new things. Their brains are so malleable at this young age, and a foreign language is a great exercise for the brain. It really stimulates learning. Also, our language classes are designed not just to address language, but also to address the culture. Being exposed to new cultures, new ways of thinking, and new experiences is important if we are going to compete on a global scale—where students are not competing with the school next door, but with students from India and China. We have to train our children that bilingualism and trilingualism is normal when conducting business in Europe and other countries. It hits on a lot of different levels. The district has been very supportive of it. I think they see the necessity as much as I do.

There are a lot of transferable skills that students can apply to English Language Arts. I think students who participate in enrichment tend to be the ones who are generally high-performing. We also made a concerted effort to get a number of our students who receive free or reduced lunch to participate in the program because we know how much they will benefit.

BTB: What do you believe has equipped you well for your position as principal and chairman of a large-scale district initiative?

MS: First, being the founding principal of an inner-city school and seeing its development really gave me insight into what goes into a good school, from being able to write the curriculum, to building the parent base, choosing the kids, working with the kids, and working with outside agencies. That experience had a profound impact on me, and opened my eyes to what it takes to lead an organization.

Secondly, my program at Columbia University has been very helpful because it focuses on change dynamics, adult development, and case studies outlining how businesses and educational institutions effect change. Also, sharing with my cohorts and teachers has been very valuable. The people in my class are from all over the country and, for the most part, are high-level educators in large, urban districts. Learning how they've instituted change either on a district or a school level, in addition to what we're learning has really helped me take a different approach to implementing a new reading program.